ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Comparability of Archived Aging-Stage and Retest Records from Miniature Temperature-Pressure Sensors: Rank, Concordance, and Response Shape.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Archived sensor records often lack synchronized reference pressure, making it necessary to distinguish retained device ordering from numerical agreement and response-shape reproduction. Aging-stage and first-retest records from 22 miniature temperature-pressure sensors were evaluated using marginal features, Spearman rank correlation, Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), device-level bootstrap intervals, and 56 equally weighted common-temperature bins. A disjoint 16-device same-mode cohort tested recurrence of marginal-feature ordering. The analysis demonstrates the following. The fifth percentile retained device order (0.886) and identity-line agreement (CCC 0.968); standard deviation retained order (0.648) without agreement (CCC 0.032), which the decomposition attributes to systematic displacement (accuracy factor 0.077), whereas the 95th percentile (CCC 0.379) is precision-limited (Pearson
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.